Jump to content

Talk:Sankt Pölten

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:St Pölten)

Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus' to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:12, 7 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC) The suggested form is the more common one, as used on the websites of both the town (German English) and the District (German), and in railway timetables, on station signs, and in German Wikipedia and commons. Also, the word "Sankt" is a German word, not an English one, and therefore "Sankt Pölten-Land District" is Denglish. On the other hand, "St." is an accepted abbreviation for both "Sankt" and its English equivalent ("Saint"), and therefore appropriate for both languages. Bahnfrend (talk) 10:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per the clear and sensible nomination. Jenks24 (talk) 08:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Pretty much every other German and Austrian settlement with a similar name is named as "Sankt Foo" on Wikipedia. There's no need to make an exception for this one. Proper names do not have to be (and should not be) translated, so the nominator's second point is irrelevant. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:58, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Necrothesp. - Darwinek (talk) 20:50, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support There is a reason to make an exception, if sources do, as the proposer seems to show. Wiki-reality does not trump actual reality. Erudy (talk) 12:56, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Then a general renaming should be proposed, as I'm sure this equally applies to every other place in Germany and Austria beginning with "Sankt". It shouldn't be piecemeal, which just breeds inconsistency. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:34, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per Necrothesp. In any case, is the proposed title particularly helpful for the reader, who is left wondering whether the name is pronounced Saint Pölten, Sankt Pölten, San Pölten, Sind Pölten or even Sveti Pölten? The sources do not show that the name is customarily translated into St. Pölten: they show that in Austria the name is customarily abbreviated, but then everyone in Austria knows that St. is a shortened form of Sankt. Skinsmoke (talk) 19:55, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 2

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. EdJohnston (talk) 16:50, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Sankt PöltenSt. Pölten – St. Pölten is the official Name for the town. See ie

I don't think roadsigns are a good source for this sort of thing. Shall we rename L'pool or M'cr? bobrayner (talk) 17:20, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In Austria it's (at least) unusual to shorten roadsigns, but good point ;) Argument stroked. --AleXXw (talk) 18:24, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Reverted name change contrary to the above decisions

[edit]

Back in December of 2014, this page was moved to St Pölten in clear contravention of the previous two consensus decisions (above) to leave it at Sankt Pölten. The move was only half done, as the article lead was left talking about Sankt Pölten without any explanation as to how that place related to the St Pölten in the article title. And the two navigation templates at the foot of the template were not changed, this negating the link->bold effect that should be seen when viewing the template through that article. Because of the counter-consensus nature of the move, and its incomplete nature, I have reverted the move. I am agnostic on which is the better article name, but just ask that any move be properly discussed and then done correctly. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 12:09, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sankt Pölten. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:29, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:26, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]